Marcott, Shakun et al: Bruksanvisning i fagfellegodkjenning av ren faglig møkk

[Telehiv]

Det er stadig svært interessant å følge med den frie (utenfor forsvarsverkene og IPCCs ringmurer), internasjonale debatten rundt Marcotts makkverk. I dag er det Nancy Green i en gjestepost hos WUWT som tar tak i Taminos forsøk på forsvare makkverket:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/04/07/marcott-3-spikes-and-you-are-out/#more-83711

Hun oppsummerer bl.a. med dette:

"What we are seeing in action is actually a form or misdirection used in stage magic.  It fools us on the stage just as it does in science.  It is our minds that create the confusion (illusion) between what the proxies actually are and what the proxy data actually is.  The proxies are ocean cores – they are real objects.  The proxy data is an abstract representation of the real object.  However in our minds we are so used to dealing with real objects as abstract representations that we are fooled into thinking they are one and the same."

Dette avføder så igjen en noteringsverdig kommentar fra signaturen Oakwood:

Oakwood says:
April 7, 2013 at 11:30 pm

"Another way of looking at the star analogy is to ask 'what size planet would we need for it to show up in our telescope?' given the resolution we have. Answer: a very big one, perhaps 100 times larger than Earth. Thus it still gives no answer as to whether there could be an Earth-sized planet.
Returning to Marcott, to get a proxy spike of +0.9 even before perturbation, the global temperature would eiether have had to have been +0.9 for a very long time (say 150 to 200 years), or MUCH higher for s shorter time (say +2 degrees for 80 years, or +3 degrees for 40 yrs). Such condititions are not representative of what we see in 20th C. If 20th C were included in Marcott, it would show a proxy value of around zero on their scale.
Thus, Tamino's work still tells us nothing about whether 20th C scale changes ocurred during the past 11,500 years. Its main achievement is to give the 'right' answer for warmists – which of course is his aim".

[Telehiv]

McIntyres øks har falt enda tyngre over Marcotts statistikk-elendighet:
http://climateaudit.org/2013/04/07/marcotts-dimple-a-centering-artifact/

I en glitrende begrunnelse for hvorfor ting blir verre og verre hos Marcott, skriver McIntyre (the man who broke Michel Mann's hockey stick) at paleoklimatiske forskere med utilstrekkelig statistikkompetanse altfor ofte tyr til ad hoc/hjemmestrikka metoder i det som skulle vært viktige artikler om viktige tema, slik at det hele blir en underlig faglig affære som roter seg bort i andre områder enn utgangspunktet egegntlig var (dette var min personlige beskrivelse av hva han i sum sier), ref. følgende utsagn:

"One of the longstanding CA criticisms of paleoclimate articles is that scientists with little-to-negligible statistical expertise too frequently use ad hoc and homemade methods in important applied articles, rather than proving their methodology in applied statistical literature using examples other than the one that they're trying to prove."

Han avslutter med denne grausame Salbe, der han også trekker en parallel til "the Mannian corpus", altså metodeproblemene - og den tilhørende motviljen mot å vise fram koden - som karakteriserer Manns arbeider: 

"I'm a bit tired of ad hoc and homemade methodologies being advanced by non-specialists in important journals without being established in applied statistical journals. We've seen this with the Mannian corpus. Marcott et al make matters worse by failing to publish the code for their novel methodology so that interested readers can quickly and efficiently see what they did, rather than try to guess at what they did.

While assembling Holocene proxies on a consistent basis seems a useful bit of clerical work, I see no purpose in publishing an uncertainty methodology that contains such an obvious bogus artifact as the mid-Holocene dimple shown above."

[Amatør1]

Jeg kom over en kort og grei oppsummering av Marcotts arbeid:

Se denne
http://www.flickr.com/photos/22384025@N08/8612653500/lightbox/

[Telehiv]

Denne tråden ble startet i mars 2013. I ettertid kan vi se at vi var tidlig ute med å forutse hvilket nivå AR5 ville bevege seg på....